Would I be disappointed in a QQ Yak

[bodywerks]

	Quote: Originally Posted by luv2flyguy
	Hey guys- I have been flying Aeroworks planes here for a while, I am looking at buying another but for some reason I have been thinking about the 102" QQ Yak, is this plane as good as it's advertisedor would I be disappointed? My AW is a great plane and flies like I want it to, I'm moving up to the 100cc class I thought I might want to try something different, no one close to me has one of these planes or I would go and look at it, one concern, is the quality as good as the AW, I'm use to the qb series and I know it will take longer to get it together than the QB series but will it last a good while of just basic flying, I'm not a 3Der not yet anyway. Thanks for all the help here on FG, this is a great family to be hooked up with.

You might be a bit dissapointed as far as quality is concerned if you are used to Aeroworks, but the qq yak does fly well and is backed by excellent customer service.

[bodywerks]

	Quote: Originally Posted by luv2flyguy
	Which AW did you order? I feel the same about the build quality and I know that the AW will weigh a little more...

Not so sure that's true anymore. As the generation number of the qq yak has gone up so has its weight. Stock builds are typically over 27 pounds. I'd say that if yo went with the cf parts on the aeroworks (260, not the yak) they'd be about the same weight. The qb yak is a 28+ pound plane unless you get really creative about equipment selection and bust out your dremel.

[dubd]

	Quote: Originally Posted by bodywerks
	You'll be dissapointed most definitely as far as quality is concerned if you are used to Aeroworks, but the yak does fly well and is backed by excellent customer service.

Did you happen to get a lemon? I've seen the newer gen Yaks from QQ and I own a Python and the quality is awesome, even when compared to my 35% AW 260.

[bodywerks]

	Quote: Originally Posted by smokin
	never in a million years would i thought i would've seen a thread that put the AW yak over the QQ in quality! hey, to each his own but i am certain that there is less mixing and coupling issues with the QQ. both will be great but wow, i thought the QQ would win this debate hands down. just my $.02

Have you owned an aeroworks plane, personally? Just the cowl and canopy/hatch alone are no comparison - simply undebatable that the aeroworks wins there. Ask anyone who has had their qq for a year how their cowl is holding up or how much their hatch has bowed or deformed in the sun. Then ask the same of an aeroworks owner.
Granted, build/finish quality isn't everything, though. And if I were in The market for a 100cc yak, I don't even think the aeroworks would even be on my list, and the qq would be at the top of it. But I am only interested in all out flight perfomance on a 100cc plane - how it looks on the ground doesn't mean much to me

[Flatlandman]

So far 25 flights on my 102" gen 4 yak it flys awesome but I havent got the 2 years on it yet so its not a good base but my buddy ( Meanrudder ) who has been learning to fly better that just hasnt till just lately been able to fly long periods of time with out incident, has a gen 2 102" yak and he has beat the @#%$ out of it and it's still in excellent shape. That plane is more than 2 years old and that plane is one of the major reasons i went with the QQ yak at the end of this summer. From his planes life experiences I can safely say that the QQ 102"/101" planes are easily a long term airframes.

[Flatlandman]

I have owned Aeroworks planes and their weight doesn't come in the form or better construction rather in forms or canopies that are way way to heavy and cowls that also weigh ridiculously to much etc etc. I have had some good experiences with their customer service though they have taken good care of me in regards to their plane.

[3D Meatshield]

I can't speak for the 100-inch class Yak, but I have the 86" and it is by far the nicest arf I've ever bought. bear in mind I haven't built too many, and it's my first giant scale to boot, but I am more than pleased enough with it that the next giant I buy will also be a QQ. It wasn't perfect out-of-the-box either, had a couple of small issues that have been rectified by Wayne with one email, less than 24 hours later- you just can't beat that kind of customer service!

Now, if I can just find a way to shoehorn a G62 in the front without having to chop off half the engine box...

[bodywerks]

	Quote: Originally Posted by dubd
	Did you happen to get a lemon? I've seen the newer gen Yaks from QQ and I own a Python and the quality is awesome, even when compared to my 35% AW 260.

Mine was definitely very bad, but of the dozens of others I have seen up close, only two of them were above average quality, although still not Aeroworks quality.

[bodywerks]

You have to understand that quality level is a subjective thing. My idea of a good quality ARF is different from anyone else's - same goes for all of you. I will never compare a chinese ARF to a BBW custom airframe, but I do have certain expectations, and Aeroworks is definitely not without its flaws, like rarely finishing out in the weight range that they claim, and paint that softens up if you put rubbing alcohol on it, and they have surely had their share of lemons.
You can show me all the pics you want of how great the quality of your plane is but it won't help. Pictures don't do quality level determination any justice whatsoever. You have to be able to see it close up, in different light, see the same plane several months later and then compare it to other planes side by side.
The QQ Yak gets the job done, though, and if you just want something that flies great and looks decent in the air then the QQ line is right up there with any other manufacturer.

[mark nichols]

My first 50 cc is the QQ 86 and it was so easy to build and set up, flies fantastic and have had no issues. Its a bit confusing this thread, how can anyone complain about the qq quality. Ive seen aeroworks and they are very good also so buy what you fancy, im saving for the python and just know im going to be so happy, hey and the qq support is second to none..

You spend your money and take your choice.

Mark
Scotland

[octanehuffer]

So, I am supposed to have fitment issues with my cowls? between the 15 Quique planes at my field there are none. Including canopy's. Basing the looks of the plane the AW looks just the same quality. An ARF is an ARF. They are not the same grade as a well built Carden. I personally dont care if there would be an issue. I care how they fly. I dont buy planes to look at them.

[crazyjoe]

My buddy has been flying a QB 100cc yak for about a month now. Both he and I have been flying the QB260 100cc for a couple years now. We both fly 3D . His yak came in at 29lbs and his extra was 27lbs. I haven't flown his yak but the 260 looks more stable in 3D. The yak does appear more responsive. The QBs quality is indisputable. In fact last weakened we were taking turns flying my 260 at the field when hovering at around 15 feet I ran out of gas. It tail slid down and landed on its belly hard and the only thing that broke was the landing gear assembly. That being said I have seen a few QQ yaks fly and they seam real forgiving. When they fall out of a maneuver they just seam to hang their no stall or snap real forgiving dont really know how to explain it. The QQ looks quit a bit bigger next to my QB260. I have enjoyed this thread because I was just thinking I liked the looks of the gen 4 and was considering getting one. Not because I think one is any better than the other but for my flying style and ability either plane would suite me just want something different. I besides the QB260 I also have a QQ python I have to say the Aeroworks plane quality seams a touch better but I have approximately 100 flights on it now and it is holding up well and flys very light. As far as the 101 inch QQ goes although the DA85 is light and powerful I like the smoother and time tested DA100. I think they are bullet proof motors and even at my altitude 6800' have all the power I need for 3D.